but will always remain a Subjective occupation tainted by the beliefs and prejudices of the Chairperson...
If that were true, it would spell the doom of either the chairperson concept or the site implementing it. I don't think it can remain true for that very reason. The power to delete relevant information (not the chairperson's definition of "relevant", but the classic "reasonable man's" definition used in courts) must be applied as objectively as possible because it takes only one abuse of it to strip a site of its CDA protection. There's no room for subjectivity. And "erring", while possibly a minor matter for someone who is only a member of a site, is a very major matter for the site for whom that member is acting as an agent.
You seem to claim you had none of these and were Impartial at all time on SI and I say: BS...
Being human, I'm sure it's impossible for me to be 100% objective, though I try to be.
An important difference is having no vested interest in what is and isn't said about a stock. Not that I'd be one to squelch someone who disagreed with me if I did have a position in the stock. It's a matter of ethics.
What I'm seeing, based on your own comments on the subject, is that it might not be a good idea for a person who has a vested interest in a stock to be able to ultimately decide what does and doesn't get said about it. Things like taking "erring" lightly, and being subjective.
So, whatever I do poorly, according to your perception, doesn't seem to affect the number of posts, which ultimately is the name of the game for iHUB management...
If I really believed that the number of posts is ultimately the name of the game here (quantity over quality -- the Raging Bull and Yahoo model) this would be my last post on this site. I don't believe it, though. Based on my conversations with the people responsible for this site, I believe the site is much more similar to SI than to RB or Yahoo.
Correction: The old SI. The same fair and conscientious enforcement of the rules (for the sake of the community) as SI has always had but with the only hands on the reins being those of competent folks who care about the community, like in the pre-GNET days of SI.
Bob, I haven't the time to be used as... a sounding board for the Chairperson concept, to see if it's worth incorporating in your next venture,
You're making an incorrect assumption. Personally, I'm reluctant to ever make assumptions and it still floors me when "stock people" do so as it's generally not a trait that's compatible with market success. Unless one can talk a lot of others into making the same assumptions, of course. <g>
so this will be my last post on the subject...
Based on your assumption, that's reasonable, so I thank you in advance for letting me have the last word on the subject. You've been quite helpful and I feel I have most of the information I needed, and what is lacking can be gained by continued observation.
Regards,
Bob
AI
